National Collegiate Athletic Association
NCAA News Archive - 2007
« back to 2007 | Back to NCAA News Archive Index
Division I baseball gets academic facelift
|
By Michelle Brutlag Hosick
The NCAA News
The NCAA News
The Division I Board of Directors approved a package at its April 26 meeting from the Baseball Academic Enhancement Working Group that includes a requirement for academic certification for student-athletes in the fall term to be eligible to participate in the spring.
The package also retains the financial aid model of 11.7 equivalencies, but limits counters to 27 and requires individual aid packages to include at least 33 percent athletics aid. The regular-season squad size is capped at 35. The recommendations, passed as emergency legislation, will take effect August 1, 2008.
The aid change is intended to solidify institutions’ financial commitment to student-athletes. In return, the package also requires student-athletes to commit to institutions by eliminating the one-time transfer exception, which will require four-year transfers to serve one academic year of residence before becoming eligible to compete in baseball.
The final part of the package requires baseball programs with a rolling, four-year average Academic Progress Rate under 900 to be subject to playing and practice season restrictions beyond those already imposed by the Academic Performance Program. For example, baseball teams not meeting the minimum academic standard of 900 over a four-year period would be forced to reduce the number of contests to 50 and the number of playing and practice season days to 119. Currently 56 contests and 132 days are allowed in the playing and practice season.
The American Baseball Coaches Association supported all the recommendations.
The working group was formed one year ago at the Board’s direction and was charged with rectifying baseball’s poor academic performance. Most troubling were data indicating that baseball student-athletes come to college with good academic credentials that are not borne out by their academic performance once they are in the collegiate setting. Baseball’s APR has been among the lowest in each year of data collection.
The Board asked the working group to propose concepts that would create meaningful change, and members said they believed the proposals would do that.
The presidents strongly supported keeping the package intact, a move that the working group indicated was necessary for the plan to accomplish the goal of improving academic performance. As at the Management Council meeting earlier this month, some Board members indicated concern about the minimum of 33 percent financial aid to individual student-athletes, even proposing an amendment to reduce the minimum percentage to 25. That amendment was defeated and the Board approved the package as presented.
The Board did indicate that it would monitor the success of the rules changes, with an eye toward further reform if the intended results were not achieved.
Text-messaging outcome upheld
Additionally, the Board adopted a proposal that bans coaches from sending text messages to prospective student-athletes. The proposal, sponsored by the Ivy Group, takes effect August 1 and was one of two proposals originally in the 2006-07 cycle related to technology in recruiting. The other proposal, which would have put limits on the practice, was defeated by the Management Council in January.
The deciding factor for the Board was the desire of the student-athletes to add restrictions. The Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee members spoke in favor of the proposal in many different settings, including a luncheon Board members had with the SAAC members in January.
Several Board members mentioned their conversations with the SAAC at Convention in which student-athletes called the practice intrusive and overused. The student-athletes also convinced Board members that text messaging and similar forms of communication were inappropriate forms of communication between a coach and a prospect.
Walter Harrison, president of the University of Hartford, said his conversations with student-athletes were persuasive.
“Board members were impressed with how adamant student-athletes were about text messaging being abused,” he said.
Earlier this month, the Management Council agreed that eliminating the practice was the best course of action at this time.
The proposal eliminates all forms of electronic communication with the exception of e-mail and facsimile. The Board left open the possibility of considering other proposals related to this issue in the future.
David Berst, NCAA vice president for Division I, said Board members were open to more discussion on the matter.
“The Board was affected by the student-athlete voice even though the presidents realize that text messaging is part of youth culture. In effect, student-athletes don’t believe it’s the right way to begin a relationship with a coach. From the Board perspective, however, the presidents recognize there may be other ways of communication that could be considered in the future,” Berst said. “Student-athletes had expressed concern while coaches expressed support. The presidents think there is probably some solution in the middle.”
In other business, the Board also approved a pilot waiver program that would offer early initial academic certification for prospective student-athletes who meet specific academic requirements after six semesters of school work. The pilot program was approved for 2007 only, with the intention of gathering data about the effectiveness of the program before making more permanent recommendations. The Division II Presidents Council approved similar action at its April 26 meeting.
Under the pilot, candidates for early certification would have a minimum 95 ACT or 1,100 SAT score. Prospects with slightly lower scores (1,000 SAT and 85 ACT) and 12 core courses completed would also qualify if their grade-point average was higher than 3.0. Once a prospect is certified as an “early qualifier,” he or she will not have to continue through the regular certification process.
Research from 2005 indicates that only a small fraction of prospects who met the specified criteria after six semesters were denied certification, and of those, most did or would have received waivers.
The pilot program would allow for early certification of about half of registrants.
The early certification program is expected to make the process more efficient during the traditionally intense summer certification period.
The Board also approved the establishment of the Supplemental Support Fund, a Committee on Academic Performance initiative that will assist limited-resource institutions in creating campus-based programs designed to improve the academic performance of student-athletes through grants.
Funding for the program would come from the planned 4.25 percent annual increases in the Division I Academic Enhancement Fund, expected to be about $1 million in each fiscal year. Any unawarded money would be returned to the academic enhancement fund for distribution.
The Supplemental Support Fund would be monitored by a subcommittee of CAP. Grants from the fund will be given to institutions that create proposals designed to increase the eligibility, retention or graduation rates of student-athletes. Once grants are awarded, the subcommittee will closely monitor the progress of the institution in the target areas. A successful program will increase team APRs and Graduation Success Rates.
The CAP also will provide comprehensive annual reports to the Board on the uses and success of the grants.
April 26/Indianapolis
The package also retains the financial aid model of 11.7 equivalencies, but limits counters to 27 and requires individual aid packages to include at least 33 percent athletics aid. The regular-season squad size is capped at 35. The recommendations, passed as emergency legislation, will take effect August 1, 2008.
The aid change is intended to solidify institutions’ financial commitment to student-athletes. In return, the package also requires student-athletes to commit to institutions by eliminating the one-time transfer exception, which will require four-year transfers to serve one academic year of residence before becoming eligible to compete in baseball.
The final part of the package requires baseball programs with a rolling, four-year average Academic Progress Rate under 900 to be subject to playing and practice season restrictions beyond those already imposed by the Academic Performance Program. For example, baseball teams not meeting the minimum academic standard of 900 over a four-year period would be forced to reduce the number of contests to 50 and the number of playing and practice season days to 119. Currently 56 contests and 132 days are allowed in the playing and practice season.
The American Baseball Coaches Association supported all the recommendations.
The working group was formed one year ago at the Board’s direction and was charged with rectifying baseball’s poor academic performance. Most troubling were data indicating that baseball student-athletes come to college with good academic credentials that are not borne out by their academic performance once they are in the collegiate setting. Baseball’s APR has been among the lowest in each year of data collection.
The Board asked the working group to propose concepts that would create meaningful change, and members said they believed the proposals would do that.
The presidents strongly supported keeping the package intact, a move that the working group indicated was necessary for the plan to accomplish the goal of improving academic performance. As at the Management Council meeting earlier this month, some Board members indicated concern about the minimum of 33 percent financial aid to individual student-athletes, even proposing an amendment to reduce the minimum percentage to 25. That amendment was defeated and the Board approved the package as presented.
The Board did indicate that it would monitor the success of the rules changes, with an eye toward further reform if the intended results were not achieved.
Text-messaging outcome upheld
Additionally, the Board adopted a proposal that bans coaches from sending text messages to prospective student-athletes. The proposal, sponsored by the Ivy Group, takes effect August 1 and was one of two proposals originally in the 2006-07 cycle related to technology in recruiting. The other proposal, which would have put limits on the practice, was defeated by the Management Council in January.
The deciding factor for the Board was the desire of the student-athletes to add restrictions. The Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee members spoke in favor of the proposal in many different settings, including a luncheon Board members had with the SAAC members in January.
Several Board members mentioned their conversations with the SAAC at Convention in which student-athletes called the practice intrusive and overused. The student-athletes also convinced Board members that text messaging and similar forms of communication were inappropriate forms of communication between a coach and a prospect.
Walter Harrison, president of the University of Hartford, said his conversations with student-athletes were persuasive.
“Board members were impressed with how adamant student-athletes were about text messaging being abused,” he said.
Earlier this month, the Management Council agreed that eliminating the practice was the best course of action at this time.
The proposal eliminates all forms of electronic communication with the exception of e-mail and facsimile. The Board left open the possibility of considering other proposals related to this issue in the future.
David Berst, NCAA vice president for Division I, said Board members were open to more discussion on the matter.
“The Board was affected by the student-athlete voice even though the presidents realize that text messaging is part of youth culture. In effect, student-athletes don’t believe it’s the right way to begin a relationship with a coach. From the Board perspective, however, the presidents recognize there may be other ways of communication that could be considered in the future,” Berst said. “Student-athletes had expressed concern while coaches expressed support. The presidents think there is probably some solution in the middle.”
In other business, the Board also approved a pilot waiver program that would offer early initial academic certification for prospective student-athletes who meet specific academic requirements after six semesters of school work. The pilot program was approved for 2007 only, with the intention of gathering data about the effectiveness of the program before making more permanent recommendations. The Division II Presidents Council approved similar action at its April 26 meeting.
Under the pilot, candidates for early certification would have a minimum 95 ACT or 1,100 SAT score. Prospects with slightly lower scores (1,000 SAT and 85 ACT) and 12 core courses completed would also qualify if their grade-point average was higher than 3.0. Once a prospect is certified as an “early qualifier,” he or she will not have to continue through the regular certification process.
Research from 2005 indicates that only a small fraction of prospects who met the specified criteria after six semesters were denied certification, and of those, most did or would have received waivers.
The pilot program would allow for early certification of about half of registrants.
The early certification program is expected to make the process more efficient during the traditionally intense summer certification period.
The Board also approved the establishment of the Supplemental Support Fund, a Committee on Academic Performance initiative that will assist limited-resource institutions in creating campus-based programs designed to improve the academic performance of student-athletes through grants.
Funding for the program would come from the planned 4.25 percent annual increases in the Division I Academic Enhancement Fund, expected to be about $1 million in each fiscal year. Any unawarded money would be returned to the academic enhancement fund for distribution.
The Supplemental Support Fund would be monitored by a subcommittee of CAP. Grants from the fund will be given to institutions that create proposals designed to increase the eligibility, retention or graduation rates of student-athletes. Once grants are awarded, the subcommittee will closely monitor the progress of the institution in the target areas. A successful program will increase team APRs and Graduation Success Rates.
The CAP also will provide comprehensive annual reports to the Board on the uses and success of the grants.
Other highlights
Division I Board of DirectorsApril 26/Indianapolis
- Agreed to sponsor legislation that would rescind a bylaw that allows student-athletes from institutions that are banned from participating in team championships to participate in individual championships. Elimination of the bylaw would prevent student-athletes from ineligible teams from taking away points-earning opportunities at individually scored championships from student-athletes competing for eligible teams (see the Committee on Academic Performance story, page 12).
- Defeated Proposal No. 06-100, which would have bestowed all decision-making power for Football Championship Subdivision matters to the Presidential Advisory Group.
- Approved a proposal eliminating the certification program in sports other than football and basketball. Events certified during the 2006-07 academic year that will be played during the 2007-08 season will be exempted from the applicable contest limitations.
- Approved the legislative package sent by the Division I Management Council, with the exception of Proposal No. 06-27, which would have allowed an institution to enter into a reciprocal marketing agreement with a professional sports organization in football and men’s basketball; and No. 06-82, which would have required that no class or exam time be missed in field hockey, women’s lacrosse, soccer and volleyball for competition conducted during the nonchampionship segment. The Board tabled No. 06-17-B, which would have precluded participation in a pool or fantasy league with the possibility of a prize.
© 2010 The National Collegiate Athletic Association
Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy